92 Decision Citation: BVA 92-07012
Y92
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
DOCKET NO. 91-38 418 ) DATE
)
)
)
THE ISSUE
Entitlement to an increased rating for presenile dementia,
currently evaluated as 50 percent disabling.
REPRESENTATION
Appellant represented by: Disabled American Veterans
ATTORNEY FOR THE BOARD
Richard F. Williams, Counsel
INTRODUCTION
This matter came before the Board of Veterans' Appeals
(hereinafter the Board) from a December 1990 decision of the
New York, New York, Regional Office (hereinafter RO). The
veteran had active service from September 1981 to July
1984. The notice of disagreement was received in January
1991. The statement of the case was issued in April 1991.
The substantive appeal was received in June 1991. The case
was docketed at the Board in August 1991. The veteran has
been represented throughout his appeal by the Disabled
American Veterans. That organization presented additional
written argument in February 1992.
REMAND
The veteran underwent a Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
psychiatric examination as recently as November 1990 for the
purpose of evaluating the disability at issue. However, as
was pointed out by his service representative in recently
received written argument, the psychiatrist recommended a
neurological evaluation. Following a preliminary review of
the record, it is the Board's judgment that more current and
thorough examinations, including the recommended
neurological evaluation, would be helpful in resolving the
issue on appeal. Accordingly, prior to the disposition of
the issue that has been prepared for appellate
consideration, the case is REMANDED to the RO for the
following actions:
1. The veteran should undergo a
neurological examination for the purpose
of determining the nature and extent of
any organic neurological disability
currently present. This evaluation
should include any indicated studies.
The claims file should be made available
to the examiner for study.
2. The veteran should also undergo a
psychiatric examination and a social and
industrial survey for the purpose of
determining the current status of his
service-connected presenile dementia.
Any studies that are deemed necessary
should be accomplished. The claims file
should be made available to the examiner
for study.
Upon completion of the above development, the case should be
reviewed by the RO. If the claim remains in a denied
status, the case should be returned to the Board for further
appellate review after compliance with requisite appellate
procedures, including the issuance of a supplemental
statement of the case that pertains to the requested
development.
In taking this action, no conclusion is implied, either
legal or factual, as to the merits of this appeal. No
action is required of the veteran until he is further
notified.
BOARD OF VETERANS' APPEALS
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20420
*
JOHN J. CASTELLOT, SR., M.D.
ROBERT E. SULLIVAN
*38 U.S.C. § 7102(a)(2)(A) (1991) permits a Board of
Veterans' Appeals Section, upon direction of the Chairman of
the Board, to proceed with the transaction of business
without awaiting assignment of an additional Member to the
Section when the Section is composed of fewer than three
Members due to absence of a Member, vacancy on the Board or
inability of the Member assigned to the Section to serve on
the panel. The Chairman has directed that the Section
proceed with the transaction of business, including the
issuance of decisions, without awaiting the assignment of a
third Member.
Under 38 U.S.C. § 7252 (1991), only a decision of the Board
of Veterans' Appeals is appealable to the United States
Court of Veterans Appeals. This remand is in the nature of
a preliminary order and does not constitute a decision of
the Board on the merits of your appeal.